Pat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 416: To ask the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment further to Questions Nos. 121 to 124, inclusive, of 9 February 2006 the reason it took a three-month period for the enforcement unit of his Department to complete general preparatory work for the institution of legal proceedings against a company (details enclosed); his plans to shorten such preparatory periods; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6486/06]

Tony Killeen (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The enforcement unit of the Department deals with the enforcement of both Labour Court and employment appeals determinations, and generally has approximately 100 cases in various stages of preparation for referral to the Office of the Chief State Solicitor to institute legal proceedings.

As indicated in previous replies concerning the case under reference, following receipt of the request from the employee for enforcement of the determination, in January 2003 a letter enclosing a copy of the determination was sent, by registered post, to the employer. In accordance with due process, this letter informed the employer that if payment was not made, the matter would be referred to the Office of the Chief State Solicitor for the initiation of legal proceedings.

The process of referral to the Office of the Chief State Solicitor requires that certain procedures be completed depending on the particulars of each case. These procedures require interaction with third parties, for example, An Post, the Companies Registration Office, the Department of Social and Family Affairs and law search firms. These firms carry out searches in the Land Registry, Registry of Deeds, sheriff's office and judgement office.

On receipt of responses from these parties the case was then referred to the Chief State Solicitors Office in early April 2003.

It is critical that the information and evidence presented at a court hearing be accurate and correct in order to have a successful outcome. The activities outlined above must therefore be undertaken diligently and thoroughly and this process can accordingly take some time to complete. The Department has no function or control over the service providers mentioned above and cannot regulate the time taken by them to provide the information requested by the Department.

Pat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 417: To ask the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment further to Questions Nos. 121 to 124, inclusive, of 9 February 2006 his views on amending the insolvency payments scheme in order that employees of struck-off companies would receive awards under the scheme when their employer has failed to honour Employment Appeals Tribunal awards; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6487/06]

Tony Killeen (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The insolvency payments scheme operates under the Protection of Employees (Employers' Insolvency) Acts 1984 to 2004, which give effect to EU Directive 80/987/EEC as amended by Directive 2002/74/EC. The scheme provides for the payment of certain unpaid entitlements due to an employee — including various Employment Appeals Tribunal awards — where an employer has become legally insolvent as defined in the legislation, but it does not cover situations where an employer has simply ceased trading without becoming legally insolvent or has been struck off the register of companies.

Since the introduction of the 1984 Act, a number of comprehensive examinations have been undertaken into the possibility of extending the scope of the legislation to cover such situations. The matter involves a number of complex issues, extending into company, bankruptcy and insolvency law and other areas, and legal advice was obtained in the course of the examinations. However, it has not been found to be possible, for legal and other reasons, to extend the legislation and the scheme to cover these situations.

Pat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 418: To ask the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment further to Questions Nos. 121 to 124, inclusive, of 9 February 2006 if he intends to amend the existing legislation in order that directors of struck-off companies who have failed to honour Employment Appeals Tribunal awards made against them would be prevented from being or seeking to be directors of another company; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6488/06]

Tony Killeen (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The disqualification of a person from serving as a company director is a serious matter which can only be determined by a High Court judge on application by the Director of Corporate Enforcement or, in certain instances, other specified parties.

It is a matter for the Director of Corporate Enforcement to determine which cases he pursues. The Deputy may wish to make a formal complaint to the Director of Corporate Enforcement supplying the details of the unfulfilled liabilities in regard to the specific case he has raised.

It is recognised that there is an issue with regard to creditor proceedings against a company which has been struck off. The Company Law Review Group, CLRG, established pursuant to Part 7 of the Company Law Enforcement Act 2001, is engaged in developing proposals for the reform and consolidation of the Companies Acts. In its first report the Company Law Review Group considered how the effects of strike-off might be mitigated for creditors and came up with a number of recommendations towards this end. The Department is currently drawing up the general scheme of the company law reform and consolidation Bill which will give effect to the CLRG recommendations and it is expected to bring the general scheme to Government for approval to draft the Bill proper later this year.